Jurisprudencia y Ciencias Sociales

URI permanente para esta comunidadhttp://repositorio.uta.edu.ec/handle/123456789/892

Examinar

Filtros

20241

Ajustes

Autor/a: search.filters.author.Santamaría Navas, José DanielTiene archivos: Sí

Resultados de la búsqueda

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
  • Miniatura
    Item type:Ítem,
    La suspensión condicional de la pena y la igualdad formal
    (Universidad técnica de Ambato, Facultad de Jurisprudencia y Ciencias Sociales, Carrera de Derecho, 2024-11)
    Santamaría Navas, José Daniel
    ;
    Rodriguez, Cristian
    The research focuses on evaluating whether the conditional suspension of sentences, regulated by Article 630 of the Comprehensive Organic Criminal Code (COIP) of Ecuador, violates the principle of formal equality by limiting its application to crimes punished with sentences not exceeding five years of imprisonment. It questions whether this restriction imposes unequal and unjustified treatment on defendants without considering the particularities of each case. The research employs a qualitative and documentary approach, reviewing and analyzing relevant laws, jurisprudence, and legal literature. A jurisprudential matrix is created to collect and systematize rulings from the Constitutional Court of Ecuador and other relevant courts. Additionally, a bibliographic review is conducted to contextualize and deepen the theoretical and normative concepts related to the conditional suspension of sentences and the principle of formal equality. The analysis of rulings reveals that the fiveyear limit imposed by Article 630 of the COIP can result in unequal treatment for defendants. Judicial decisions emphasize the importance of evaluating each case based on its specific circumstances, respecting the principles of proportionality and necessity. The analyzed rulings underline the need for an equitable interpretation and application of criminal norms to ensure respect for the principle of formal equality. The research concludes that the conditional suspension of sentences, as currently regulated, may violate the principle of formal equality by not considering the particularities of each case